Talk:Codex (Origins)
I don't want seperate pages for each codex entry, thanks. I would prefer either just the one page, a page for each section, or none at all. Thanks very much. --Selty 03:46, November 6, 2009 (UTC) :If we don't have pages for each entry, then this page will have 317 entries. A page for each would probably be best, but a page for each section would be second best but would still be cluttered for some sections such as the culture one. I will stop making separate pages until you say what should be done seeing as how your mod. Apocalypsefu 04:02, November 6, 2009 (UTC) :So do we want to have the text of the codex pages on the main page (like what I did for the controls section) or move the full text onto the section pages (ex: Codex: Controls)? Clh 20:37, November 6, 2009 (UTC) :It's a bit too much to have on a single page, I think the info should go into their respective section pages at the very least. At the same time, 317+ articles all made of codex entries is a bit too much too. The Codex is an organized almanac already: cramming everything into a single page is not an effective way of displaying the already-organized information. Ivokk 23:00, November 6, 2009 (UTC) :: Agreed, let's have a page for each section, and link the sections from this page. -- 17:21, November 9, 2009 (UTC) ::I wish they would have just done these as icons instead of numbers... Or that they had done the entries for the DLCs differently. Warden's Keep and The Stone Prisoner entries are mixed in with the core Codex entries meaning a total of 326 entries instead of just 317 (if that's correct with no DLCs). How do you want the DLC entries added? The numbering only starts to become an issue starting in Culture and History - 161 entries instead of 157. i.e. Alistair is listed here as Codex Entry 158, but in my codex he's 162 & still the first entry. --Pteague 02:52, November 10, 2009 (UTC) Delete So, after a bit of thought, I really am thinking the codex should be left to be discovered, and not copied word for word onto the wikia. --Selty 13:12, November 10, 2009 (UTC) :Allot of the wiki is "stating the obvious" and adds information for "lazy people". I'm not sure that the every player will get the complete codex on the first run, and filling the gaps could be beneficial to those players. :An alternative is creating a page for each codex entry or a group of entries, adding the in-game codex entry (if needed) and allowing authors to add more information beyond what is written in the codex - for example, creating a page about demons with sub-headings for each demon that contains the codex entry and maybe some tactics in dealing with that demon. --silverstrike 16:38, November 10, 2009 (UTC) :I definitely think the organization still needs to be figured out, but I like the idea of having the full Codex text on here somewhere. I think the wiki benefits from having as much information as possible. Clh 16:43, November 10, 2009 (UTC) :Alternatively we can move the Codex entries onto their respective subjects. So if you want (for example) to view the codex entry on Arcane Horrors you go to the Arcane Horror page; we can have the Codex page in list format to redirect to their sections in case anyone needs it. Ivokk 22:35, November 10, 2009 (UTC) ::Well I always thought the point of a wiki for a game was to bring all the information from that game and have it all located somewhere. Deleting the codex would take a major part of the game away from the wiki. And I think it would do more harm then good. Because if you really want to discover all the entrys for yourself, go ahead, nothings forcing you to spoil it for yourself, its not like you HAVE to visit this page. [[User:Apocalypsefu|''pocalypsefu'' Ø'']] 23:20, November 10, 2009 (UTC) :Discovering codex entries is a significant part of the game but we must consider that one of the primary roles of wikia is easy access to knowledge and there are a lot of people who simply doesn't have time, interest, money, capable platform or any other means to purchase and/or play the whole game to find every codex entry. So, if there are no legal restrictions like copyright, I think people have the right to reach the codex (or the "lore" in general) without buying the game. And if you worry about spoiling the fun of discovery; our nice, red, eye-catching spoiler warning should suffice. --Kaeli Sulvairn 11:47, November 11, 2009 (UTC) :Total newbie, but I agree that the Codex is useful to have online. Especially if, for example, you just want to quickly look something up but don't want to have to load up the entire game to see it. I do think that each section of the codex should be on a different page. Don't know how to deal with the numbering issues though. -- Ancestralmask 15:16, November 11, 2009 (UTC) Cleaning up the article I moved all of the codex entries to the relevant pages, besides ''Spell Combination - I don't see a reason for creating a page with only two entries - when and if more will be added, we can change this as well. --silverstrike 19:27, November 11, 2009 (UTC) :: This looks much better and seems to be a less unwieldy. Thank you! Now I'm not afraid to tackle codex entries! :) Cynnamin 19:41, November 11, 2009 (UTC) Codex Entries Numbering It seems that depending on the DLC installed, an entry number will change. This causes a bit of a problem updating the codex pages on the wiki and make the numbering seem redundant and confusing. I suggest that we remove the numbering from the entries and only show the title of the entry insted of: "Codex Entry XX: title". --silverstrike 17:40, November 12, 2009 (UTC) :I agree. It's too bad, but there's really no other good solution. As long as they're kept in the proper order it should be fine. Rallion 02:12, November 13, 2009 (UTC) ::Unless someone with the complete DLC is willing to go and put placeholders for every codex entry, I foresee alot of problems with people trying to be helpful but not knowing where the codex should go; they might put it where ever and mess up the whole process even more. The problem that without numbers to indicate an order, it's hard to know if there even is an order. Of course, I am just raising an issue that has no obvious solution, it's really quite vexing. --Lilkam 07:35, November 17, 2009 (UTC) :::I have both DLCs (Stone Prisoner and Soldier's Peak) and can say that not do the numbers change, but apparently the order itself changes as well. I could certainly go through and re-order them based on what my version (PC) says they are... but I have no way of knowing if that order would be the same for someone with the console versions. I'm assuming it isn't. Offkorn 07:43, November 19, 2009 (UTC) Work on the Codex - December 2009 Now that so much of the codex text has been added, I'm working on the format of the category pages and linking them into other relevant articles (see Forum:Codex_Entries for background). I'm removing numbers from entry titles - as noted on this page there's an issue with using them as they can shift around with DLC. Numbers are still displayed in the body of each entry. Outstanding tasks in codex categories I've started work on appear on the discussion page for the category. Zoev 15:19, December 17, 2009 (UTC) All category pages now have info boxes and numbers have been removed from codex entry headings. --Zoev 00:51, December 19, 2009 (UTC) Question Is it possible to have ALL codex entries, being a Dalish Elve??? Closed codex instances The codex in Awakening and the DLC campaigns are closed, meaning there is no expansion of entries and new numbers like in Origins. They also differ from the Origins codex because some entries are missing and other are added. Shouldn't the have their own overview pages, because at the moment it's very hard to find the new entries of those campaigns. --ShardofTruth (talk) 01:05, March 11, 2011 (UTC) :This should eventually get done once someone finds the time to do it. In meantime, you can go to these categories: :*Category:Dragon Age: Origins codex entries (this one contains codex entries like the Stone Prisone's) :*Category:Dragon Age: Origins - Awakening codex entries :*Category:Witch Hunt (just Ctrl+F "codex entry") :*Category:The Stone Prisoner :*Category:Warden's Keep :*Category:The Golems of Amgarrak :*Category:Return to Ostagar :I don't know if they have all the codex entries properly categorized though, or if they're complete. --'D.' (talk · ) 02:48, March 11, 2011 (UTC) ::Thanks for the fast answer, this will help. It seems that at least Awakening is missing some entries (or maybe they are really not properly categorized) and one or two are missing from Amgarrak and Witch Hunt. I will look into that and add them if they're missing. --ShardofTruth (talk) 03:27, March 11, 2011 (UTC) :::I added the missing codex entries and categorized the Awakening ones correctly, all entries should be online now. Only some of the character entries are not 100% complete, because some plot choices are missing. :::The closed codex instances will not work out as I thought they could. The main problem is still the numeration, I don't know why but even sometimes some entries are even switched from "Culture And History" to "Magic And Religion" or the other way around, even in Awakening and the standalone DLCs. Maybe it has something do do with the gaming platform or if the Warden is Orlesian or not. Anyway, the next problem is that in "The Darkspawn Chronicles" and "Leliana's Song" 95% of the entries can't be collected by normal means, Bioware should've removed them from the modules, but apprently they were to lazy to do so, another point why the whole codex system is completely flawed. :::I think the best solution would be to list the additional entries in the respective articles like it's done in some of them already. --ShardofTruth (talk) 00:57, March 31, 2011 (UTC)